linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
To: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
	oleg@redhat.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org,
	paulmck@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, surenb@google.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v3 04/13] uprobes: travers uprobe's consumer list locklessly under SRCU protection
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 21:29:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240813042917.506057-5-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240813042917.506057-1-andrii@kernel.org>

uprobe->register_rwsem is one of a few big bottlenecks to scalability of
uprobes, so we need to get rid of it to improve uprobe performance and
multi-CPU scalability.

First, we turn uprobe's consumer list to a typical doubly-linked list
and utilize existing RCU-aware helpers for traversing such lists, as
well as adding and removing elements from it.

For entry uprobes we already have SRCU protection active since before
uprobe lookup. For uretprobe we keep refcount, guaranteeing that uprobe
won't go away from under us, but we add SRCU protection around consumer
list traversal.

Lastly, to keep handler_chain()'s UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE handling simple,
we remember whether any removal was requested during handler calls, but
then we double-check the decision under a proper register_rwsem using
consumers' filter callbacks. Handler removal is very rare, so this extra
lock won't hurt performance, overall, but we also avoid the need for any
extra protection (e.g., seqcount locks).

Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
 include/linux/uprobes.h |   2 +-
 kernel/events/uprobes.c | 111 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b/include/linux/uprobes.h
index 9cf0dce62e4c..29c935b0d504 100644
--- a/include/linux/uprobes.h
+++ b/include/linux/uprobes.h
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ struct uprobe_consumer {
 				struct pt_regs *regs);
 	bool (*filter)(struct uprobe_consumer *self, struct mm_struct *mm);
 
-	struct uprobe_consumer *next;
+	struct list_head cons_node;
 };
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_UPROBES
diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
index 8bdcdc6901b2..7de1aaf50394 100644
--- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ struct uprobe {
 	struct rw_semaphore	register_rwsem;
 	struct rw_semaphore	consumer_rwsem;
 	struct list_head	pending_list;
-	struct uprobe_consumer	*consumers;
+	struct list_head	consumers;
 	struct inode		*inode;		/* Also hold a ref to inode */
 	struct rcu_head		rcu;
 	loff_t			offset;
@@ -783,6 +783,7 @@ static struct uprobe *alloc_uprobe(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset,
 	uprobe->inode = inode;
 	uprobe->offset = offset;
 	uprobe->ref_ctr_offset = ref_ctr_offset;
+	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&uprobe->consumers);
 	init_rwsem(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 	init_rwsem(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
 	RB_CLEAR_NODE(&uprobe->rb_node);
@@ -808,34 +809,10 @@ static struct uprobe *alloc_uprobe(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset,
 static void consumer_add(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
 {
 	down_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
-	uc->next = uprobe->consumers;
-	uprobe->consumers = uc;
+	list_add_rcu(&uc->cons_node, &uprobe->consumers);
 	up_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
 }
 
-/*
- * For uprobe @uprobe, delete the consumer @uc.
- * Return true if the @uc is deleted successfully
- * or return false.
- */
-static bool consumer_del(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
-{
-	struct uprobe_consumer **con;
-	bool ret = false;
-
-	down_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
-	for (con = &uprobe->consumers; *con; con = &(*con)->next) {
-		if (*con == uc) {
-			*con = uc->next;
-			ret = true;
-			break;
-		}
-	}
-	up_write(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
-
-	return ret;
-}
-
 static int __copy_insn(struct address_space *mapping, struct file *filp,
 			void *insn, int nbytes, loff_t offset)
 {
@@ -929,7 +906,8 @@ static bool filter_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm)
 	bool ret = false;
 
 	down_read(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
-	for (uc = uprobe->consumers; uc; uc = uc->next) {
+	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
+				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
 		ret = consumer_filter(uc, mm);
 		if (ret)
 			break;
@@ -1125,18 +1103,31 @@ void uprobe_unregister(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
 	int err;
 
 	down_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
-	if (WARN_ON(!consumer_del(uprobe, uc))) {
-		err = -ENOENT;
-	} else {
-		err = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, NULL);
-		/* TODO : cant unregister? schedule a worker thread */
-		if (unlikely(err))
-			uprobe_warn(current, "unregister, leaking uprobe");
-	}
+
+	list_del_rcu(&uc->cons_node);
+	err = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, NULL);
+
 	up_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 
-	if (!err)
-		put_uprobe(uprobe);
+	/* TODO : cant unregister? schedule a worker thread */
+	if (unlikely(err)) {
+		uprobe_warn(current, "unregister, leaking uprobe");
+		goto out_sync;
+	}
+
+	put_uprobe(uprobe);
+
+out_sync:
+	/*
+	 * Now that handler_chain() and handle_uretprobe_chain() iterate over
+	 * uprobe->consumers list under RCU protection without holding
+	 * uprobe->register_rwsem, we need to wait for RCU grace period to
+	 * make sure that we can't call into just unregistered
+	 * uprobe_consumer's callbacks anymore. If we don't do that, fast and
+	 * unlucky enough caller can free consumer's memory and cause
+	 * handler_chain() or handle_uretprobe_chain() to do an use-after-free.
+	 */
+	synchronize_srcu(&uprobes_srcu);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_unregister);
 
@@ -1214,13 +1205,20 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_register);
 int uprobe_apply(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc, bool add)
 {
 	struct uprobe_consumer *con;
-	int ret = -ENOENT;
+	int ret = -ENOENT, srcu_idx;
 
 	down_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
-	for (con = uprobe->consumers; con && con != uc ; con = con->next)
-		;
-	if (con)
-		ret = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, add ? uc : NULL);
+
+	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
+	list_for_each_entry_srcu(con, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
+				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+		if (con == uc) {
+			ret = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, add ? uc : NULL);
+			break;
+		}
+	}
+	srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
+
 	up_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 
 	return ret;
@@ -2085,10 +2083,12 @@ static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 	struct uprobe_consumer *uc;
 	int remove = UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE;
 	bool need_prep = false; /* prepare return uprobe, when needed */
+	bool has_consumers = false;
 
-	down_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 	current->utask->auprobe = &uprobe->arch;
-	for (uc = uprobe->consumers; uc; uc = uc->next) {
+
+	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
+				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
 		int rc = 0;
 
 		if (uc->handler) {
@@ -2101,17 +2101,24 @@ static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 			need_prep = true;
 
 		remove &= rc;
+		has_consumers = true;
 	}
 	current->utask->auprobe = NULL;
 
 	if (need_prep && !remove)
 		prepare_uretprobe(uprobe, regs); /* put bp at return */
 
-	if (remove && uprobe->consumers) {
-		WARN_ON(!uprobe_is_active(uprobe));
-		unapply_uprobe(uprobe, current->mm);
+	if (remove && has_consumers) {
+		down_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
+
+		/* re-check that removal is still required, this time under lock */
+		if (!filter_chain(uprobe, current->mm)) {
+			WARN_ON(!uprobe_is_active(uprobe));
+			unapply_uprobe(uprobe, current->mm);
+		}
+
+		up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 	}
-	up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 }
 
 static void
@@ -2119,13 +2126,15 @@ handle_uretprobe_chain(struct return_instance *ri, struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	struct uprobe *uprobe = ri->uprobe;
 	struct uprobe_consumer *uc;
+	int srcu_idx;
 
-	down_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
-	for (uc = uprobe->consumers; uc; uc = uc->next) {
+	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
+	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
+				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
 		if (uc->ret_handler)
 			uc->ret_handler(uc, ri->func, regs);
 	}
-	up_read(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
+	srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
 }
 
 static struct return_instance *find_next_ret_chain(struct return_instance *ri)
-- 
2.43.5



  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-08-13  4:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-13  4:29 [PATCH v3 00/13] uprobes: RCU-protected hot path optimizations Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH v3 01/13] uprobes: revamp uprobe refcounting and lifetime management Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH v3 02/13] uprobes: protected uprobe lifetime with SRCU Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH v3 03/13] uprobes: get rid of enum uprobe_filter_ctx in uprobe filter callbacks Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2024-08-22 14:22   ` [PATCH v3 04/13] uprobes: travers uprobe's consumer list locklessly under SRCU protection Jiri Olsa
2024-08-22 16:59     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-22 17:35       ` Jiri Olsa
2024-08-22 17:51         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH v3 05/13] perf/uprobe: split uprobe_unregister() Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH v3 06/13] rbtree: provide rb_find_rcu() / rb_find_add_rcu() Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH v3 07/13] uprobes: perform lockless SRCU-protected uprobes_tree lookup Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH v3 08/13] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH RFC v3 09/13] uprobes: SRCU-protect uretprobe lifetime (with timeout) Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-19 13:41   ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-19 20:34     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-20 15:05       ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-20 18:01         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH RFC v3 10/13] uprobes: implement SRCU-protected lifetime for single-stepped uprobe Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH RFC v3 11/13] mm: introduce mmap_lock_speculation_{start|end} Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH RFC v3 12/13] mm: add SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU to files_cache Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  6:07   ` Mateusz Guzik
2024-08-13 14:49     ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-08-13 18:15       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  4:29 ` [PATCH RFC v3 13/13] uprobes: add speculative lockless VMA to inode resolution Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-13  6:17   ` Mateusz Guzik
2024-08-13 15:36     ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-08-15 13:44       ` Mateusz Guzik
2024-08-15 16:47         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-15 17:45           ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-08-15 18:24             ` Mateusz Guzik
2024-08-15 18:58             ` Jann Horn
2024-08-15 19:07               ` Mateusz Guzik
2024-08-15 19:17                 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2024-08-15 19:18                   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2024-08-15 19:44               ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-08-15 20:17               ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-15 13:24 ` [PATCH v3 00/13] uprobes: RCU-protected hot path optimizations Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-15 16:49   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-21 16:41     ` Andrii Nakryiko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20240813042917.506057-5-andrii@kernel.org \
    --to=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).